dude says: (1/11/16 7:42 AM)
Seems like an awful lot of money for what it achieves.

jdc says: (1/11/16 8:32 AM)
To me this is sort of a 'no brainer' in terms of spreading around - and linking to - the massive redevelopment going on in near SE. From the city's perspective, more development = more taxes.

202_cyclist says: (1/11/16 8:56 AM)
@jdc:

Exactly right-- someone posted a comment on the Capitol Hill Corner blog estimating the expected future tax revenue of creating an entirely new neighborhood: link

Additionally, there are other benefits, such as linking neighborhoods and allowing more people to live in a walkable neighborhood and near transit, including the Potomac Ave station.

monkeyrotica says: (1/11/16 10:22 AM)
More roads = more congestion. Why does this "boulevard" even exist? Instead of spending $120 mil (which will eventually bloat to $200+ mil) just sell the land, build residential/retail, and re-open the north/south streets.

conngs0 says: (1/11/16 11:01 AM)
Agree with jdc. Doesn't the status quo risk maintaining a barrier between the planned development in Hill East by Stadium Armory and the 11th Street Bridge Park and the rest of the Navy Yard area? It sure seems like this would help maximize the returns on those other investments.

jdc says: (1/11/16 12:03 PM)
My fantasy - yes, I may need help - is that the explosive growth and interest in SE, then SW, and then 'eco district' they're building around L'Enfant, will lead to financial incentives sometime in my lifetime to tunneling and locating 695/SE-SE Freeway underground. Basically, selling air rights. It's about 5 miles as configured, and I wonder if that figure could be cut down if it took a more direct route. Yes, everyone will think of the "Big Dig" mess - but, a recent piece sort of exonerated the project and I bet in another 10-20 years it will be an accepted piece of US infrastructure. Plus, the lessons learned and the advancement in drilling will make this an easier project in all likelihood.

conngs0 says: (1/11/16 2:05 PM)
Even in the case of the Big Dig, I don't think it's the project itself that needs exoneration - it's the execution of the project. One of the reasons why the people of Boston were so against hosting the Olympics was that, based on the cost overruns and delays, they had zero faith that their local government could properly execute such a huge expenditure. After all, it's not that hosting an Olympics has to cripple the local economy; it's that hosting an Olympics typical cripples the local economy because the host country/city does such a poor job of planning the games.

I have a similar opinion of your fantasy regarding putting the SE Freeway underground. Would it benefit the neighborhood and the city (and commuters)? Could it be a worthwhile project? Absolutely. But you have to have faith in the execution.

An even better example of this phenomenon is the Metro 2040 plan. link This would undoubtedly be fantastic for the city. It'll never happen though because the people responsible for implementing such a plan will certainly mess it up!

Let's see how the Capitol Crossing project pans out. If that winds up being a success, perhaps there will be more support for significant infrastructure improvement along the lines you have in mind.